On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
> > On Feb 21, 2004, at 00:26, Bert Bos wrote:
> >
> > > 4) If all else fails, assume UTF-8.
> >
> > Why not windows-1252 (with the few undefined bytes mapped to
> > *something* so that all byte streams can be converted some
> > "characters")?
Why not? Because there are a lot of stylesheets in encodings other
than Windows-1252. If you don't like UTF-8, you'd better ask for
ISO-646:IRV.
> > Anyway, it's just
> > plain stupid to use non-ASCII outside comments in a style sheet that
> > doesn't have a character encoding label and doesn't have a BOM, so in
> > the relatively rare cases where this heuristic fails, the author would
> > have only him/herself to blame.
>
> Indeed. And currently most style sheets contain Ascii only.
True in Western Europe and most other parts of the world. Not true in
Japan, China and Korea. I'm not talking about comments here. A number
of stylesheets list font-family names in Chinese, Japanese and Korean in legacy
encodings (GB2312, Big5, Shift_JIS, EUC-JP, EUC-KR, etc).
Jungshik